Complaint Review: Roscoe Antique Mall of South Beloit

Roscoe Antique Mall - 1019 Gardner Street South Beloit, IL 61080

Office of the Attorney General - State of Illinois - Consumer Protection Division

Attn:  Adam Zbroja 
Re:  Jack /////// (last name omitted as per Ripoff Report instructions)
File no:  2012-CONSC00338248 

To Whom It May Concern,

The situation listed in this complaint is unfounded and has a lengthy background of which we would like to share:

January 7, 2004 Jack came into our store and made a purchase of a Hull Ewer priced at $125.   I waited on him personally.  I told him the price, had him sign the credit card receipt, and gave him the store receipt. 

Three weeks later I received a notice from my credit card company of a complaint that we charged him the wrong price.  I disputed the claim, provided the proof and judgment was in my favor. 

Jack continued to shop in our store as if nothing had happened and so we just let it go.  

November 1, 2004 Jack applied to rent a space in our mall and we rented him a booth.  He was a dealer with us until March 1, 2010.  He dealt with customers during this time, sold merchandise, and was very familiar with how the mall operated.  

During his time with us he wanted to expand and in addition to selling his own items on eBay he also offered a service to our dealers.  It was not successful. 

March 30, 2007 - Jack was very interested in Native American artifacts and my husband Dennis (my husband and co-owner of the mall) had a pottery vase that looked like it could be of that origin.  

Jack spoke with Dennis about the vase and Dennis explained that he was unfamiliar with Native American pottery and therefore could not make the determination if the vase was actually of that origin.  His tag on the item clearly called it simply a piece of pottery.    

Jack asked for Dennis best price and made the choice to purchase on his own gut instinct.  About one month later Jack started complaining that he had someone look at it and it wasnt Native American.  

Dennis, being as cooperative as possible and with the goal of keeping our dealer happy, told him that since it belonged to us we would give him his money back, which we did reluctantly .

March 1, 2010 - Jack left his booth in the mall. 

February 5, 2012 Jack came into the mall to shop.  He inquired on two pieces of art glass, a pink vase attributed to Steuben and a topaz and blue art glass vase also attributed to Steuben.  He spoke

directly with the dealer before purchasing, he could have asked any questions he wanted to and he did dicker for the BEST price possible. 

The dealer in no way guaranteed it to be Steuben but stated per his tag that the vase appeared to be in the style of Steuben but was unsigned.  Jack chose to purchase the pink vase and put the blue/topaz vase on layaway.   

He returned two weeks later claiming he had put the vase on eBay and was getting comments that it was not Steuben and he wanted his money back.   I met with Jack and tried to explain that he could not buy merchandise and then return it when it didnt sell on eBay.   

We looked at the original tag which stated attributed I showed him a definition of attributed and I expressed that he needed to be more informed before buying in hopes of big profits.   

We have a no-return policy as do all antique malls.  He was our dealer for six years and certainly knew mall policy.   Even though the mall has a no return policy it has also been our goal to resolve any issues that arise. 

However, in this instance Jack spoke with the dealer, dickered to get his bottom dollar, and then wanted to return the piece because it was not selling as he had hoped.   This is not something we have ever allowed but wanting to resolve this and end his complaints and threats, we spoke with the selling dealer who agreed to refund the money as long as it Jack did not purchase further items from his booth.

March 9, 2012 we allowed Jack to return the pink vase and refunded his money.  On that date Jack also wanted to pick up the blue/topaz vase he had on layaway. 

We expressed at this time that he could void the layaway if desired and that now was the time to do it as we did not want a repeat of the pink vase incident.  We discussed with him the fact that the layaway vase was also unmarked and only attributed to Steuben and that he needed to be certain he wanted to take the risk that it would sell as such.  

We clearly stated that if he chose to pay the balance and remove the vase from the store that it was his no return allowed.  There were several employees as witness to our offer and his refusal.  Jack said he was certain this vase was right and he wanted to purchase it.   

We also asked him at that time to stop shopping in our mall.  

Antique dealers know that when they are buying something to resell there is no guarantee that they can get more money for something . . . it is based on their knowledge and judgment and sometimes they win and sometimes they dont.   

One of the suggestions I make repeatedly in our monthly newsletter is that whenever making a purchase of substantial cost make sure you know what you are buying to lessen the risk. 

None of us in the antique business are allowed to purchase antiques and return them when they cannot be resold at a profit.  

That was the last time we saw Jack . . . . then your letter of complaint arrives in the mail.

Please Note:  

We are a very reputable antique mall that handles quality antique merchandise.  We have been in business 14 years and have never had an unresolved issue.

Our dealers do their best to describe their merchandise but we tell all our customers that the final determination must lie with them and their knowledge  . . . especially on any higher dollar items where we do not want to ever be accused of misrepresentation . . .

we always direct customers to err on the side of caution especially on unmarked or unsigned items.  

We hold classes on antiques, educate our dealers and customers on reproductions, and represent our merchandise as accurately as possible while still giving as much information as possible.

Now on the subject of art glass . . . . Dealers who sell art glass often attribute unsigned pieces to a certain maker.  It does not guarantee the piece is by that maker since it is unsigned.  

Styles of art glass made in the early 1900s were often copied among all the high end makers in an attempt to capitalize on whatever was successful at the time.   

Collectors all have opinions and sometimes the actual maker is never known.  If the vase that Jack purchased is not Steuben then it fits into this category . . . it certainly is not some new reproduction.  

Antiques dictate a no return policy for many reasons.   

The main one being that once an antique leaves our mall there is no way to guarantee that the return would be in the same condition or even be the same piece that was originally purchased.  

There are sly people who do attempt to deceive . . . however the mall makes every attempt to be honest and trustworthy.  This is what our reputation is built on. 

We feel that we gave Jack every opportunity to void the layaway purchase of the topaz/blue vase prior to final payment.   The terms of the purchase were discussed at great length and he agreed to purchase it with no recourse to return it if it did not sell as anticipated.  

In addition printed on his receipt is this statement:

ALL SALES FINAL All Items Sold As Is With No Guarantees Of Any Kind

His complaint is totally invalid and I am sorry that this took up your time as well as ours.

Sincerely, /////////// (name omitted as per Ripoff Report instructions) co-owner

Roscoe Antique Mall of S. Beloit